Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

A brand new feedback forum for our massively revised draft!
User avatar
Benedict
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1027
Joined: 23 May 2016, 09:52

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by Benedict » 01 Nov 2017, 04:04

Agamemnon wrote:
myanbar wrote:t's a fencing term. A "play" refers to a fencing technique, a specific string of actions and responses. The translations of old fechtbuchs are where the term comes from. Free sparring is often known as freeplay. Plays with the sword are "swordplay." I believe it's a very good word choice and it adequately describes a length of 2 tempos. The real world meaning of play lines up with the in-game meaning of play. So, you're looking at the word with its theatrical definition in mind, but the appropriate context is the fencing definition. I expect many modern RPG players unfamiliar with HEMA will read it the way you did. Similarly I think most will see "fencing" and think not of real fighting with real weapons but of sport fencing. I think that's okay because these games can spark an interest in HEMA, and it's good to use terms associated with it.

Bingo.

Good. The little grumbler stops grumbling. :D

In that case a snippet explaining how things came to be would be neato. Not all of the people playing are into HEMA. Without some reference many points will be lost, these HEMA term associations making sense only to HEMA practitioners.


myanbar wrote:Deflect says
Close-reach or shorter weapons are AC1 unless they have a complex guard or basket hilt, as are any hafted weapons when used one-handed.

If I understand things correctly. Otherwise Agamemnon or higgins will correct me.
But what is this about hafted weapons? Does that mean one-handed hafted weapons always have AC1, and that one-handed hafted weapons with a complex guard or basket hilt have AC0 instead?

Only Short hafted weapons are 1h. These always Deflect at AC1.
Medium are 1.5h. These deflect one-handed at AC1 or two-handed at AC0.
Hafted weapons don't have a Basket Hilt/Complex Guard option. This is for Blades only.

What about your forearms? Does "unarmed" count as a "weapon" for the purpose of Deflect's AC?

Your forearms are Hand reach weapons. So they Deflect at AC1. Plus they suffer a MoS0 Swing by default when the Deflect succeeds.

Another question, this one a tactical one: Since Expulsion always costs AC1, and assuming Expulsion is generally "better" than Deflect, then if you're in a situation where your Deflect would be AC1, do you have any reason to perform a Deflect instead of an Expulsion? Are there maneuvers or other qualities that interact with Deflect but not Expulsion, or vice versa?

Mainly Links. A Deflect can be part of a Link, whereas an Expulsion can't. Plus it requires a weapon or a shield -- no unarmed Expulsions. That aside, I think that Expulsion should also share the same AC increase with Deflection: +1AC for using Close-Reach or shorter Blade without Complex Guard/Basket Hilt OR Hafted weapon used one handed.


I don't understand the purpose of Master-Strike. It has no benefit on an attack; the rules say to just treat it as an attack. You'd pay AC2 for nothing. It only has benefit on defense, and that benefit is to improve upon a standard Compound Link. Why doesn't Master-Strike just say it's DEF only (not "OFF or DEF"), say you perform a Deflect & Swing or Deflect & Thrust, but if your Deflect is successful you get the bonuses: your MoS as bonus dice to your follow-up Swing or Thrust, and no Disadvantage on it.

  • Declare as an attack and pay the activation cost. Roll vs. Base TN.
  • If your opponent is defending, treat as a normal swing or thrust attack.
  • If your opponent is attacking (even in a Red/Red), Master-Strike counts as though you’d used the Compound link maneuver for a Deflect & Swing (or Thrust).
  • If the initial die roll is successful, you gain your MoS for an additional attack made in the same Tempo.
  • Unlike a normal Linked attack, the secondary maneuver does not suffer a disadvantage for using the blade again.
One: is it supposed to somehow be possible to launch two attacks in one tempo with it? That's the understanding I take from the language of "If the initial die roll is successful, you gain your MoS for an additional attack made in the same Tempo." Referring to the preceding maneuver as "the first die roll" rather than "the attack" or "the defense" implies the roll could be either of those things. This is reinforced by how it says you can make an "additional" attack. So, are you supposed to be able to use Master-Strike to attack, then follow up with another attack?

Yes. If the opponent defends I roll as normal attack. If the attack goes through I immediately gain MoS dice to make another Swing or Thrust in the same tempo.
Two: If it's a Red/Red situation, do you declare this as an offense, or as a defense? If two people in Red/Red Master-Strike each other, do they count as "Defending" to one another?

More tricky. I think that they both end up as "defending". Winner deflects and makes a MoS followup. On Tie no defense succeeds, no followup occurs, and Initiative stays with original attacker.

The real question here is this: Who is the original attacker in a Red/Red?
Three: Are you allowed to use defenses other than Deflect, and attacks other than Swing and Thrust? The Maneuver does say you act as if you're doing a Deflect & Swing or Deflect & Thrust, not that you have the choice of doing something like a Beat or Murder Stroke instead.

No, the text is explicit. If the opponent attacks I roll as a normal defense (deflect). If the defense succeeds I immediately gain MoS dice for another Swing/Thrust followup in the same tempo.

If you want Murder Strokes (or anything but Swing/Thrust) in there, or another Defense (which by the way is the only linkable alternative to Deflect is Dodge) you'll have to use Compound or Counter.

It's perfect if you ask me.

8) The book says you could perform a Deflect Counter & [Bind & Strike]. How would this work in practice?

Now that is a bitch. It depends on what you are using.
Let's say you use sword and shield and your CP is 12. Your opponent is similarly equipped and is at 12CP too.

  • Play1
    • Tempo1: You Deflect with the sword blade with 6 (+1AC Compound) dice against a 6 dice swing. You score 4 the opponent scores 3. MoS1. You get 3 extra dice for Bind.
    • Tempo2: You have 5+3=8 dice. Opponent has 6 dice. You Bind with shield for 6 dice (1CP left) with no Disadvantage. Opponent goes with Expulsion at 5 dice (0CP left). You score 4 vs 3 = MoS1 again.

      You have the choice to either:
      • Inflict MoS1 Impact to opponent that carries over Refresh because he is at 0CP.
      • Continue with a 2 dice (1CP left + MoS1) unopposed Strike to your opponent. If you opt to strike with the shield or with the blade you are at Disadvantage. Instead you can Thrust with the pommel or kick him in the nuts at normal chances.

As you can see it comes down to choice of gear. If you used a single rapier you couldn't Bind (requires shield); instead you could Deflect Counter & [Beat & Strike Compound] for example. And you'd have fewer different parts to link in order to avoid Disadvantage.
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
― Touchstone
taelor
Journeyman
Posts: 150
Joined: 23 Apr 2015, 05:55

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by taelor » 01 Nov 2017, 14:25

Which maneuvers qualify as "shield-based" for purposes of the boss attribute in the shield codex?
GLENDOWER
I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
HOTSPUR
Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them?
David Mogendo
Wanderer
Posts: 7
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 22:50

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by David Mogendo » 02 Nov 2017, 08:44

A few questions about Tribulation.

Are shields still using the Fixed Target Number at TN3?

What is the function of Bulk in combat?

Preemptively: thanks for any answers.
I may have more questions later.
"Nice to meet you." Said the man with the red hands.
But the man lied.
Lied through his teeth to a mirror.
User avatar
Benedict
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1027
Joined: 23 May 2016, 09:52

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by Benedict » 02 Nov 2017, 10:06

taelor wrote:Which maneuvers qualify as "shield-based" for purposes of the boss attribute in the shield codex?

Anything using a shield that has AC1+. Namely:
  • Deflect (?): Deflect has AC1 for Close or shorter weapons. Shields do not have reach, but they can strike for 0b. Needs clarification.
  • Expulsion
  • Bind: requires Medium or Large shield
  • Heavy Blow: free +1DR Heavy Blows with Boss? Needs clarification.
  • Slam


David Mogendo wrote:Are shields still using the Fixed Target Number at TN3?

By the looks of it shields now use BTN, not FTN.

David Mogendo wrote:What is the function of Bulk in combat?

We can only guesstimate, since we miss the Encumbrance section.

Judging by 'Bastards and from what I read on the record sheet:

Combat Pool = Reflex + Proficiency - Encumbrance

Encumbrance = (Gear Bulk - Brawn Rank) + (Armor Bulk - Grit Tap)

OR

Encumbrance = [Gear Bulk + (Armor Bulk - Grit Tap)] - Brawn Rank

Needs clarification.
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
― Touchstone
David Mogendo
Wanderer
Posts: 7
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 22:50

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by David Mogendo » 02 Nov 2017, 12:03

Follow up questions.

Ostensibly, could one favor two different locations if they had two weapons? (Ex. A rapier and dagger wielder favoring his arm with the dagger and favoring his face with the rapier)

Shouldn't a pommel/crossguard be considered 'crushing' (as per the weapon tag) when used with a Mordhau to properly represent the bludgeoning, hammer-like effect it would have?

Also the wording on the 'throw' grappling maneuver seems strange: "If you go down with the victim, add +1DR. You are not considered prone."

This seems contradictory give that you are going "down" with your target.

Final question, still regarding the confusing wording above, does 'going down' with a target add +1DR even if the ground beneath them isn't hard?

Once again, thank you. Sorry for all the questions.
"Nice to meet you." Said the man with the red hands.
But the man lied.
Lied through his teeth to a mirror.
myanbar
Initiate
Posts: 94
Joined: 17 Jan 2016, 17:16

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by myanbar » 03 Nov 2017, 04:31

Don't apologize for asking questions. That's what the developers want us to do.

1) After a grapple has already been initiated, can you use the Grab maneuver?

2) While I understand Maintain works only if you do the exact same maneuver in the exact same way, the example it uses is Hold. This is an issue since the Hold maneuver doesn't specify a target, but the example acts as if it does. Once you try to Hold, you never have to "re-target" it like you might if you used a Snap instead. I think that example should be written to use Snap instead of Hold.

3) Can you link a Grab and any grapple maneuver, or only Grab and Snap or Throw?
User avatar
EinBein
Sworn Brother
Posts: 507
Joined: 03 May 2014, 02:50

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by EinBein » 03 Nov 2017, 05:09

Less question than suggestion:
Sweep wrote:Swing your weapon in wide arcs around you in order to make yourself a less inviting target. During the hazard phase of the play, set aside dice from your CP on a 2:1 basis. You mechanically become a hazard with a req equal to 1 for every 2 dice you’ve spent from your combat pool (e.g., 4 dice creates an r2 hazard). Any opponent that would attack you must overcome a hazard roll equal to the req you’ve created. On a failure, they are struck by your weapon and suffer damage per its swing profile with an MoS equal to their MoF on the hazard roll.
Only opponents who beat the hazard roll may engage the lone combatant in this play, but they have the initiative. Up to three opponents may engage the lone combatant simultaneously. If no opponents beat the hazard roll, the lone combatant gains initiative and may pick an opponent of their choosing and fight with them one-on-one.

Wouldn't it be good to add a restriction to weapon reach? I can't imagine a guy with a dagger, sweeping at half a dozen angry mob members with spears and forks and providing a "hazard"... Maybe you can just Sweep angainst weapons of shorter reach, or only Sweep with long or extended reach weapons?
User avatar
Benedict
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1027
Joined: 23 May 2016, 09:52

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by Benedict » 03 Nov 2017, 06:46

David Mogendo wrote:Ostensibly, could one favor two different locations if they had two weapons? (Ex. A rapier and dagger wielder favoring his arm with the dagger and favoring his face with the rapier)

RAW no. Still it's a very logical and interesting suggestion.

David Mogendo wrote:Shouldn't a pommel/crossguard be considered 'crushing' (as per the weapon tag) when used with a Mordhau to properly represent the bludgeoning, hammer-like effect it would have?

I hope it just slipped from the draft, as it slipped from 'Bastards. Withour Crushing it makes no sense.

myanbar wrote:After a grapple has already been initiated, can you use the Grab maneuver?

I think it's redudant; both are in a grapple, Grab puts you in a grapple, no point using Grab while in a grapple :
Grab an opponent by their limb, clothes, or even hair to initiate a grapple.


myanbar wrote:While I understand Maintain works only if you do the exact same maneuver in the exact same way, the example it uses is Hold. This is an issue since the Hold maneuver doesn't specify a target, but the example acts as if it does. Once you try to Hold, you never have to "re-target" it like you might if you used a Snap instead. I think that example should be written to use Snap instead of Hold.

I think that's an issue with the Hold wording, nothing more.

myanbar wrote:Can you link a Grab and any grapple maneuver, or only Grab and Snap or Throw?

RAW you can link any grappling maneuver from a Grab. You can link into Snap or Throw without entering a full grapple if you want.

EinBein wrote:Wouldn't it be good to add a restriction to weapon reach? I can't imagine a guy with a dagger, sweeping at half a dozen angry mob members with spears and forks and providing a "hazard"... Maybe you can just Sweep angainst weapons of shorter reach, or only Sweep with long or extended reach weapons?

I think you're 50% right. A dagger sweep against a pitcfork & spear mob indeeds sounds funny. A sweeping rapier on the other hand (long vs extended) doesn't sound silly at all.
Since it's relevant to Reach I'd suggest something like:
"Any opponent using a weapon up to one Reach Category greater than your weapon that would attack you must overcome a hazard roll equal to the req you’ve created."
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
― Touchstone
myanbar
Initiate
Posts: 94
Joined: 17 Jan 2016, 17:16

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by myanbar » 03 Nov 2017, 07:15

You do have a reason to Grab while in a grapple. Grab gives you bonus dice on your next grappling maneuver. I just playtested with a friend and they thought you could Grab whilst grappling because it gives a bonus to your next grappling move. Now, it looks like a bad tactical decision compared to Hold, but my question is if Grab is allowed at all. I think it isn't allowed since Grab says it initiates a grapple and you can't initiate if you're already in one, but it'd be good if this were more clear.

On the subject of clarity:
Grab is not restraining, but if used as a defense (or in a red/red situation) a success will prevent an attack from the limb being grappled and grant you initiative as though from a successful defense.

This is really oddly specific language. For example, RAW, if you have a sword and I have initiative, and I Grab your sword arm, but you decide to attack without initiative, Grab is not restraining and your attack goes through. If the intent for Grab is to stop a limb that's attacking you, it should say something like "Grab acts as if it were restraining against a limb that's attacking you". My guess is this is to let people with two weapons, or a weapon and shield, respond to a limb Grab with an attack from the other limb.

This also leads to a weird issue where you can't avoid getting clocked in an unarmed fight. If you have initiative and declare a Grab at one of my arms or legs, I can punch or kick with one of the other legs. Or heck, even if we're armed and you grab my weapon arm, I could kick you. So with initiative, doing an un-Linked Grab will work, but it's also an invitation to for me to attack you without initiative. Your grab will resolve unchallenged, but as it inflicts no Impact, my attack will also resolve unimpeded. Is this what the developers intend? Grab was restraining in Band of Bastards, so this was a conscious change.

Finally, if you have initiative and declare a Grab at me, and I declare a Grab without initiative in return, and we both succeed, will we both get bonus dice to our following grapple maneuvers?
David Mogendo
Wanderer
Posts: 7
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 22:50

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by David Mogendo » 03 Nov 2017, 08:23

I have more questions regarding favoring and unarmed combat, but I think I'll save them for a later as to not be a nuisance.
"Nice to meet you." Said the man with the red hands.
But the man lied.
Lied through his teeth to a mirror.
User avatar
Benedict
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1027
Joined: 23 May 2016, 09:52

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by Benedict » 03 Nov 2017, 10:07

myanbar wrote:You do have a reason to Grab while in a grapple. Grab gives you bonus dice on your next grappling maneuver. I just playtested with a friend and they thought you could Grab whilst grappling because it gives a bonus to your next grappling move. Now, it looks like a bad tactical decision compared to Hold, but my question is if Grab is allowed at all.

Reverse the situation and you'll get a paradox.

Grab is AC0 like Resist. I am in a grapple and the opponent used a Hold on me. I'm better off using Grab than Resist. Resist will give me a successful defense + Initiative for next Tempo; Grab will give me a successful defense + Initiative + MoS CP bonus for next Tempo. However.

pg 151 wrote:Grappling is a condition initiated by a successful Grab maneuver. Grappling changes the nature of the conflict somewhat, allowing access to grapple-specific maneuvers while limiting the use of regular weapons and maneuvers. Melee weapons are limited to Swing, Thrust (including Draw Cut and Pinpoint, respectively), Stunt, and Wrap maneuvers only. Point Blank may be used with a firearm, but no weapons can be thrown.

Hand and Close reach weapons work normally, but Short or longer weapons are limited to using pommel strikes only. Weapons that require two hands cannot be employed at all.

Hands are melee weapons. RAW one can't use Grab while in a grapple.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

myanbar wrote:On the subject of clarity:
Grab is not restraining, but if used as a defense (or in a red/red situation) a success will prevent an attack from the limb being grappled and grant you initiative as though from a successful defense.

This is really oddly specific language. For example, RAW, if you have a sword and I have initiative, and I Grab your sword arm, but you decide to attack without initiative, Grab is not restraining and your attack goes through.

First you'll have to examine some things:
  • what does Restraining means
  • How Red/Red works
  • How attacking from defense works
  • What happens when you are in a grapple (explained above)

    RESTRAINING
    pg 148 wrote:Some maneuvers will be restraining. On a success, a maneuver with the restraining property will automatically negate any offensive maneuver from the affected opponent yet to be used in the same tempo.

    RED/RED
    pg 141 wrote:If both characters throw red, things can get messy. Known as a “Double without defense,” both parties attack simultaneously, with neither party defending themselves unless a defense is built into the maneuver they are using. The character who rolled the lowest on the d6 throw declares their attack and dice first, then the other character does the same. Resolve both maneuvers simultaneously, unless someone tries to steal initiative (pg XX). Unless otherwise stated by the maneuver, the effects of either maneuver will only apply after both have been rolled.

    ATTACK FROM DEFENSE
    pg 144 wrote:Resolve their attack unopposed. Any impact you suffer comes out of the dice you allocated for your attack first. If you have any dice remaining, you roll your own attack instead. Attacking from defense doesn’t normally grant initiative. You gain initiative only in the event that your opponent has zero CP in the following tempo.



    Example 1: "you have a sword and I have initiative, and I Grab your sword arm, but you decide to attack without initiative, Grab is not restraining and your attack goes through"
    I could also respond that the attack will go through only if I mess up (0 successes) with that Grab. If I Grab it counts like a successful defense, blocking your attack.
    The problem is that rules go around in a circle, because attacking from defense resolves the attack after calculating Impact from the attack you ignored (no opposed roll), however Grab acts as a defense against an attack.


    myanbar wrote:This also leads to a weird issue where you can't avoid getting clocked in an unarmed fight. If you have initiative and declare a Grab at one of my arms or legs, I can punch or kick with one of the other legs. Or heck, even if we're armed and you grab my weapon arm, I could kick you. So with initiative, doing an un-Linked Grab will work, but it's also an invitation to for me to attack you without initiative. Your grab will resolve unchallenged, but as it inflicts no Impact, my attack will also resolve unimpeded. Is this what the developers intend? Grab was restraining in Band of Bastards, so this was a conscious change.

    I think this is rules intended. You can always ignore my offensive Grab and kick me in the balls instead. Gutting me with a rapier isn't an option if I succeed because it counts as a defense for the limb (sword arm) being grabbed; if I grabbed something else (your neck) you'd be limited to hilt strikes with the rapier. Now, if you used rapier+main gauche, well, that's another story. However you must be sure that you will roll many successes to counterbalance my unopposed MoS bonus from Grab that will fuel something nasty in the coming Tempo (or the same if it was a Link) -- or even better severely injure me.

    That aside I think that the "Attack from Defense" thing is making it awkward; read on.


    myanbar wrote:Finally, if you have initiative and declare a Grab at me, and I declare a Grab without initiative in return, and we both succeed, will we both get bonus dice to our following grapple maneuvers?

    One could say that RAW it depends if you declare it as a defense or an offense. Let's see.
    1. Offense Grab vs Defense Grab: We can't succeed at the same time in a contested roll: you succeed, I succeed, or we tie.
    • You succeed: You get Initiative and MoS CP bonus for grappling.
    • I succeed: I retain Initiative and MoS CP bonus for grappling.
    • Tie: I retain Initiative and we continue to next Tempo without other effects.

    OR

    2. Offense Grab vs Offense Grab without Initiative (non-contested)
    • Offense Grab rolls vs TN: MoS x becomes grapple bonus dice, character remains attacker.
    • Offense Grab without Initiative rolls vs TN: MoS y becomes bonus grapple dice, character remains defender.
    • Next Tempo: Attacker has +xCP for grappling attack; Defender has +yCP for grappling defense.

Note: As I explained above, attacking from defense ignores the attack aimed at you which gets resolved first, you take impact, and dice permitting, you attack; still Grab counts as a successful defense against an attack; once again the unopposed part of attacking from defense makes it a can of worms.

I think the biggest thing with Grab is that it's an OFF or DEF maneuver at our option that makes the whole thing a mess when combined with stuff like attacking from defense or in Red/Red situations.

My suggestion:
  • Axe the attack from defense concept because it adds unnecessary clutter . After all there are numerous options with Stealing Initiative, Linking Defense+Offense, etc.
    OR
  • Make Grab similar to Master-Strike: Against an Attack it counts as a Defense; against a Defense it counts as an Attack; meaning you can't use Grab to attack from defense
    AND/OR
  • Make Grab inflict Impact MoS instead of granting MoS bonus dice

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

David Mogendo wrote:I have more questions regarding favoring and unarmed combat, but I think I'll save them for a later as to not be a nuisance.

Don't be silly! You can't be a nuisance. That's my job. :lol:

Jokes aside, ask away. There aren't bad questions, there are questions. This thread is exactly about this: asking questions, no matter how trivial they might seem. ;)
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
― Touchstone
User avatar
Benedict
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1027
Joined: 23 May 2016, 09:52

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by Benedict » 03 Nov 2017, 11:37

myanbar wrote:This question is about Stomp and Compound. If you attack me with a Swing, and in response I declare a Deflect & Thrust, then you STOMP away your Swing and my Deflect, do I still roll my Thrust?


Compound wrote:If you were defending, a success negates the oncoming attack per the defensive maneuver. In addition, you get your MoS as bonus dice for a secondary maneuver as above, performing it in the same tempo with the same results.

Stomp wrote:After the AC is paid, discard all of your declared dice and all of the dice your opponent declared for their defensive maneuver. As there was no true attack, no dice are rolled. You maintain initiative and move on to the next tempo.

If I understand it correctly. I Swing for 6 dice you Deflect & Strike for 8 dice. I Stomp. No dice are rolled because of Stomp, so you can't get a MoS out of that discarded Deflect to fuel that upcoming Thrust. All allocated dice for Swing (+2AC for Stomp) and Deflect & Thrust are lost (8 for me, 8 for you); we move on to the next Tempo, me having Initiative.
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
― Touchstone
David Mogendo
Wanderer
Posts: 7
Joined: 01 Sep 2017, 22:50

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by David Mogendo » 03 Nov 2017, 11:37

In that case:

Could one favor a wheel when unarmed? (similar to how a boxer holds a hand to the side of his face as protection) if so, it should be ineffective against weaponry given the difference in mass and force. (I personally would rule that an unarmed combatant cannot favor, for simplicity's sake)

How do inappropriate weapons factor into grappling?:

Tribulation states that any two handed weapon cannot be used. Can their pommels(for swords) or hafts(for polearms/larger mass weapons) be used?

What if the fighter doesn't decide to ditch their weapon for fear of losing CP to an inferior proficiency? Can he even perform the defensive grappling manuevers (break/resist/reverse)?

Is favoring applicable in grappling? Could the man above favor with his inappropriate weapon, or use a shield to favor?

Thank you for being open to questions, I also look forward to your comments on the strange wording of the throw maneuver that I mentioned previously.
"Nice to meet you." Said the man with the red hands.
But the man lied.
Lied through his teeth to a mirror.
User avatar
Benedict
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1027
Joined: 23 May 2016, 09:52

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by Benedict » 03 Nov 2017, 13:41

David Mogendo wrote:Could one favor a wheel when unarmed? (similar to how a boxer holds a hand to the side of his face as protection) if so, it should be ineffective against weaponry given the difference in mass and force. (I personally would rule that an unarmed combatant cannot favor, for simplicity's sake)

RAW yes, he can favor one Wheel for one die, even unarmed.

David Mogendo wrote:Tribulation states that any two handed weapon cannot be used. Can their pommels(for swords) or hafts(for polearms/larger mass weapons) be used?

RAW.
Hand and Close reach weapons work normally, but Short or longer weapons are limited to using pommel strikes only. Weapons that require two hands cannot be employed at all.

Meaning that a Spear (1.5H, Extended) can be used to strike with a knob/queue while a Quarterstaff (2H, Long) can't. :mrgreen:

To be honest I'd rule it as this:

  • Any weapon that has the Grappling tag can be used normally -- always under the restrictions grappling imparts.
  • 1h without Grappling tag: limited to hilt/knob strikes.
  • 1.5h & 2h: limited to hilt/knob strikes when employed with Half-Sword/Staff Grip, and then at a Disadvantage.

David Mogendo wrote:What if the fighter doesn't decide to ditch their weapon for fear of losing CP to an inferior proficiency? Can he even perform the defensive grappling manuevers (break/resist/reverse)?

If one is in a grapple during Refresh he is forced to switch to Brawling for CP calculation, no matter what weapon he is using. Because:
All grappling uses the Brawling proficiency and all grapple maneuvers are considered to be restraining.


Example:
You have Swords 6 Brawling 0 Reflex 4. You're armed with a rapier. 6+4=10CP.
You are Grabbed: you immediately enter a grapple unless the opponent chooses not to (see below on Throw how). Unless you can break out of that grapple when the new Play comes up your CP will be calculated with your Brawling proficiency even if you are still holding the rapier; however you can tap your Swords Tap Value into it instead: Ref 4 + ( because Brawl 0) Swords Tap 1 = 5CP.

David Mogendo wrote:Is favoring applicable in grappling? Could the man above favor with his inappropriate weapon, or use a shield to favor?

In the previous edition grappling nullified Reach Control and Favoring. I believe that it will be the same now, and it was left out by mistake.

David Mogendo wrote:I also look forward to your comments on the strange wording of the throw maneuver that I mentioned previously.

Grab can be used to link into a Snap or Throw maneuver without entering a full grapple.

If you go down with the victim, add +1DR. You are not considered prone.

As I explained above when you are in a grapple you must form CP using Brawling the first Refresh that finds you in a grapple.

In the aforementioned example (Swords 6, Brawling 0) the swordsman could link a Grab & Throw to have the opponent down without ending in a grapple, hence using Swords instead of Brawling for CP formation during the coming Refresh.


youtu.be/W0fV1oB3j4c
Check this out. Has various throws - some that don't go down, others that do; in essence its whether you go for a take down or not. By the looks of it you have 4 combinations: throw but not in grapple, throw and take down but not in grapple, throw and in grapple, throw and take down and in grapple.
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
― Touchstone
myanbar
Initiate
Posts: 94
Joined: 17 Jan 2016, 17:16

Re: Beta Feedback: IV Tribulation

Post by myanbar » 03 Nov 2017, 16:28

Benedict wrote:
myanbar wrote:This question is about Stomp and Compound. If you attack me with a Swing, and in response I declare a Deflect & Thrust, then you STOMP away your Swing and my Deflect, do I still roll my Thrust?


Compound wrote:If you were defending, a success negates the oncoming attack per the defensive maneuver. In addition, you get your MoS as bonus dice for a secondary maneuver as above, performing it in the same tempo with the same results.

Stomp wrote:After the AC is paid, discard all of your declared dice and all of the dice your opponent declared for their defensive maneuver. As there was no true attack, no dice are rolled. You maintain initiative and move on to the next tempo.

If I understand it correctly. I Swing for 6 dice you Deflect & Strike for 8 dice. I Stomp. No dice are rolled because of Stomp, so you can't get a MoS out of that discarded Deflect to fuel that upcoming Thrust. All allocated dice for Swing (+2AC for Stomp) and Deflect & Thrust are lost (8 for me, 8 for you); we move on to the next Tempo, me having Initiative.

When declaring a Compound maneuver, my understanding is you declare the dice allocated to both maneuvers. You don't [Deflect & Thrust] for 8 dice, you Deflect with 8 dice and Thrust with some other number of dice. Successful use of Compound gives you bonus dice for the secondary maneuver. Because they're bonus dice, that implies they're in addition to normal dice. It's different language than Band of Bastards had, which makes me think the change was intentional. In BoB it was clear the follow-up maneuvers dice came completely from the results of the first roll. Here, since they talk about bonus dice, I think you're instead supposed to allocate dice to each maneuver. If this is the case, then your Stomp would negate my Deflect, but then I'd still have dice remaining on a Thrust.
Post Reply